Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

There is never enough information to eliminate all possible explanations except 'aliens'. On those occasions when additional information eventually emerges, the explanation often proves to be something no-one had even thought of. How can you eliminate possible explanations that haven't even occurred to you?

__________________"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett

Some times the best explanation science can offer is "We don't know." This doesn't mean space creatures are visiting us.

UFO nuts and CTs can't admit this though...they can't admit to not knowing

I think its time to leave this thread now that it has attracted the attention of the escapees from the asylum.

__________________► 9/11 was a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists; 12 Apollo astronauts really did walk on the Moon; JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,who acted alone.
► Never underestimate the power of the Internet to lend unwarranted credibility to the colossally misinformed. - Jay Utah
► Heisenberg's Law - The weirdness of the Universe is inversely proportional to the scale at which you observe it, or not.

Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.

Posts: 1,984

skyeagle409: You apparently haven't learned anything from the last time you entered one of these conversations. I am thinking in particular of your Minuteman story, and also the JAL story, both of which were comprehensively shredded on your last outing.
Do your other tales rely on the same flimsy speculation, or is there more substance to them?

It is just a matter of using the process of elimination. For an example, do we have flying vehicles capable of flying at hypersonic speeds within the atmosphere and not create a sonic boom? Some UFOs have been tracked at over thousands of miles per hour and in 1952, one UFO was tracked in the Washington D.C. area at 7200 mph and no sonic boom was heard. In another case, multiple UFOs flew near a B-29 in 1952 near Galveston, Texas at over 5000 mph.

Based on my own experience and what I know from declassified government intelligence and military documents --among other many other things--ET is here and has been for centuries. Here is one small example of thousands of references where flying saucers were tracked by Project Mogul and other balloon teams.

UFO encounters by military and civilian pilots are nothing knew and the advanced technology nature of UFOs encountered underlines the fact the objects are not ours. In the America West encounter, the object was hundreds of feet long, and I might add the UFO was confirmed by a F-117 stealth fighter pilot flying in the general area.

Audio tape recordings between civilian and military radar personnel made during the UFO encounter have been available to the public where the military confirms on tape the tracking of that huge UFO, but I find the Japan Airlines 1628 UFO encounter over Alaska even more interesting because of the huge size of the UFO that was described as larger than two aircraft carriers, which was also confirmed by FAA and Air Force ground-based radars. FAA documents on the Japan Airlines UFO encounter are now available to the public. The radar data was flown to the East Coast and examined by hardware and software specialist who later confirmed the huge size of the UFO that maneuvered around the B-747, which was accompanied by two smaller objects.

A bit more than two months later, an Air Force KC-135 encountered a similar object of size and shape in the general region and communication tapes of that UFO encounter with the KC-135 are now available to the public along with letters from the FAA controllers who were involved in the JAL 1628 incident. Not long after the KC-135 encounter, an Alaska Airlines jet encountered a UFO in that general region.

I have also been aware that a detachment from Wright-Patterson AFB was sent to Alaska and they also encountered a UFO. Photos taken of the UFO during that encounter were then classified and sent via courier back to Wright-Patterson AFB, and I might add the photos are still classified to this very day, but I can also add that gun video footage taken by a climbing Air Force jet of a UFO that was hovering above 30,000 feet over Wright-Patterson AFB has been released to the public.

I find the Navy pilot UFO encounters interesting but expect more such revelations to be revealed by the government in the future.

That particular reply was directed at the knee jerk eye roll some will display thinking aliens are naturally involved. Everyone one on this forum has not enough information to form a definitive opinion.

Some times the best explanation science can offer is "We don't know." This doesn't mean space creatures are visiting us.

It is all very simple to understand. The object was not a weather balloon nor anything to do with temperature inversion. The object is obviously an artificial flying object that exhibited advanced technology unknown to mankind, a fact the Air Force mentioned in its 1952 intelligence report, which once again, reconfirmed its 1948 ETOS report that concluded the objects were "Interplanetary Spaceships."

Ever wondered why years ago, and thanks to the FOIA, the U.S. Army confirmed the existence of its 'Interplanetary Phenomenon Unit (IPU) which was supported by Project Moon Dust and Operation Blue Fly? Think about it.

There is never enough information to eliminate all possible explanations except 'aliens'. On those occasions when additional information eventually emerges, the explanation often proves to be something no-one had even thought of. How can you eliminate possible explanations that haven't even occurred to you?

It is well-known that these objects exhibit advanced technology not found in the closet of mankind. For an example, if I don't have a blue car that is parked in front of my home, then the blue car cannot be mine based on the fact that I don't have a blue car, which means the blue car cannot be mine.

I am very sure the saucer that flew along side Aerolíneas Argentinas over Bariloche, Argentina in 1995 as it was approaching the airport was not that of mankind. Not only did people on the ground see the saucer as it flew along side the airliner, but passengers and crew watched the saucer as well as it flew along side of their aircraft and I should also mention that parts of the city lost power as the object passed overhead. The object interfered with the aircraft in such a way that the pilot had to conduct a missed approach.

UFOs can be a hazard to air traffic and in some cases, military pilots were lost as they tried to intercept UFOs. Ronald Reagan became a believer after witnessing a UFO flying in formation with his aircraft over California while he was governor, but it is what the UFO did afterward that opened everyone's eyes on his aircraft, which exhibited technology not found in the our closet. In other words, if mankind doesn't have that advanced technology, then the advanced technology exhibited cannot be that of mankind.

Given that trained and experienced fighter pilots can do things like mistaking their own wingtip light for a SAM launch and misidentifying friendly APCs wearing dayglo orange ID flags. I think I'll hang on for harder evidence (I'd love it to be true though).

That particular reply was directed at the knee jerk eye roll some will display thinking aliens are naturally involved. Everyone one on this forum has not enough information to form a definitive opinion.

It is just a matter of using the process of elimination to determine whether these objects are ours or theirs. For an example, does mankind have saucers capable of hypersonic flight within the atmosphere and not generate a sonic boom? If the answer is no, then the saucers cannot be ours.

F-16's had similar encounters with UFOs over Belgium as the Navy pilots. I obtained the following radar data from one of the F-16's sent to intercept a large triangular-shaped UFO over Belgium. The UFO was tracked on multiple and dissimilar ground-based radars which guided the two F-16's to the location of the UFO until contact was made with their radars. Here is the radar data and note from the data that mankind does not have a flying vehicle capable of such extreme maneuvers, which were so violent that the UFO broke their radar locks on multiple occasions.

F-16 Radar Data on a UFO

Seconds after Heading Speed Altitude lock-on (degrees) (knots) (feet)

00 200 150 7000

01 200 150 7000

02 200 150 7000

03 200 150 7000

04 sharp 200 acceleration 150 6000

05 turn 270 = 22 g 560 6000

06 270 560 6000

07 270 570 6000

08 270 560 7000

09 270 550 7000

10 210 560 9000

11 210 570 10000

12 210 560 11000

13 210 570 10000

14 270 770 7000

15 270 770 6000

16 270 780 6000

17 270 790 5000

18 290 1010 4000

19 290 1000 3000

20 290 990 2000

21 290 990 1000

22 300 990 0000

22.5 300 980 0000 Break lock

NOTE: The UFO accelerates to hundreds of miles per hour and change altitudes in mere seconds, which is something that no aircraft can do, which is another means of how we can differentiate between flying vehicles that are ours and theirs.

It was also noted that at no time was a sonic boom heard despite the fact the UFO flew at supersonic speed just before radar lock was broken.

I think the government is slowly preparing the public for UFO disclosure

Wow nearly 70 years - now that is SLOW. Question what part of the government is doing this? Because other parts of said government are conducting research like the type that is the subject of the thread.

It is all very simple to understand. The object was not a weather balloon nor anything to do with temperature inversion.

As a general rule whales aren't weather balloons or temperature inversions. Here is the story when it first appeared in Aviation Week in 2007.

(Pilot)FAST EAGLES (110/100) COULD NOT FIND UNID AIRBORNE CONTACT AT LOCATION GIVEN BY PRINCETON. WHILE SEARCHING FOR UNID AIR CONTACT, FAST EAGLES SPOTTED LARGE UNID OBJECT IN WATER AT 1430L. PILOTS SAW STEAM/ SMOKE/CHURNING AROUND OBJECT. PILOT DESCRIBES OBJECT INITIALLY AS RESEMBLING A DOWNED AIRLINER, ALSO STATED THAT IT WAS MUCH LARGER THAN A SUBMARINE.

It is well-known that these objects exhibit advanced technology not found in the closet of mankind.

Actually, it is not well-known that these objects exhibit any kind of technology, advanced or not. These objects are unidentified, and the fact that they are able to move at velocities greater than mach 1 without causing any kind of sonic boom, and that they kind change direction in defiance of the laws of physics, indicate that they are probably not real in the sense that they consist of matter.

Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.

Posts: 1,984

Originally Posted by skyeagle409

It is just a matter of using the process of elimination to determine whether these objects are ours or theirs. For an example, does mankind have saucers capable of hypersonic flight within the atmosphere and not generate a sonic boom? If the answer is no, then the saucers cannot be ours.

F-16's had similar encounters with UFOs over Belgium as the Navy pilots. I obtained the following radar data from one of the F-16's sent to intercept a large triangular-shaped UFO over Belgium. The UFO was tracked on multiple and dissimilar ground-based radars which guided the two F-16's to the location of the UFO until contact was made with their radars. Here is the radar data and note from the data that mankind does not have a flying vehicle capable of such extreme maneuvers, which were so violent that the UFO broke their radar locks on multiple occasions.

F-16 Radar Data on a UFO

Seconds after Heading Speed Altitude lock-on (degrees) (knots) (feet)

00 200 150 7000

01 200 150 7000

02 200 150 7000

03 200 150 7000

04 sharp 200 acceleration 150 6000

05 turn 270 = 22 g 560 6000

06 270 560 6000

07 270 570 6000

08 270 560 7000

09 270 550 7000

10 210 560 9000

11 210 570 10000

12 210 560 11000

13 210 570 10000

14 270 770 7000

15 270 770 6000

16 270 780 6000

17 270 790 5000

18 290 1010 4000

19 290 1000 3000

20 290 990 2000

21 290 990 1000

22 300 990 0000

22.5 300 980 0000 Break lock

NOTE: The UFO accelerates to hundreds of miles per hour and change altitudes in mere seconds, which is something that no aircraft can do, which is another means of how we can differentiate between flying vehicles that are ours and theirs.

It was also noted that at no time was a sonic boom heard despite the fact the UFO flew at supersonic speed just before radar lock was broken.

Here you go again. This data was also debunked in the last thread, when I believe (if memory serves me right) that someone with radar experience showed how, if this was actually representing a flight path of a UFO, that the craft would have been flying underground at certain times.
I also pointed out, in some detail, how your conclusions about this incident are based on your own interpretations, not on anything the Belgian military said.
How is it that you have not taken any of this on board? A skeptic is separated from a dogmatist by their willingness to adjust their beliefs in light of the evidence, something you have singularly failed to do.

Surprised there's not a thread on this, sort of. Leave it to Trump to make it so evidence of something otherworldly is not the #1 piece of news.

Anyway, it seems the Pentagon has spent a bit of taxpayer dollars trying to determine what to make of various UFO reports. The program was shut down in 2012, but it has recently been declassified and as a skeptic, I really think the reporting and video is pretty compelling.

Alongside the video, we have interviews with the principle players, the pilots, the folks involved in the investigation and such. Our most sophisticated radar systems confirmed what the pilots were seeing.

It's probably safe to say that whatever it is, it needs more study. These encounters are apparently numerous. This paragraph from the linked article is pretty much where I stand:

Quote:

While not addressing the merits of the program, Sara Seager, an astrophysicist at M.I.T., cautioned that not knowing the origin of an object does not mean that it is from another planet or galaxy. “When people claim to observe truly unusual phenomena, sometimes it’s worth investigating seriously,” she said. But, she added, “what people sometimes don’t get about science is that we often have phenomena that remain unexplained.”

I'm thinking along the lines of thuse temperature anomalies, some kind of energy pattern that shows up on radar. Maybe some kind of visual manifestations too, might have something to do with the coatings on aircraft glass. Or the multiple, multiple layers of the glass.

__________________Great minds discuss ideas.
Medium minds discuss events.
Small minds spend all their time on U-Tube and Facebook.

It is implied in the stories that the Pentagon was using the program to assess if Russia and China, for example, were testing/employing new technologies for the purposes of surveillance and/or warfare. The military intelligence official that was in charge of the program believes that the evidence suggests less mundane explanations for the reported phenomena but it is not clear that his former bosses agree with him.

Of course the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program was a black program, so who can say if the phenomena are not part of a different black program? Since the various off the book programs are unlikely to communicate between one another perhaps the government is looking at their own handiwork but don’t know it?

Re the videos: It certainly could be an elaborate hoax, however, one would hope that two out of three of the authors of the NYTimes article, Helen Cooper and Ralph Blumenthal, would have done their due diligence and ruled out artifacts as a source of the phenomena.

The Times reporters are no slouches. Cooper is the Times pentagon correspondent and was on the team that won a Pulitzer in 2015 for reporting on the Ebola epidemic in West Africa. Blumenthal led the team that won a Pulitzer for their work covering the World Trade Center bombing in 1993. He's won numerous awards for his reporting.

The third author, Leslie Kean, is a whole 'nother matter, though, she's not only written about UFO's and the military :'UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go On the Record', but has also written about other fringe subjects 'Surviving Death: A Journalist Investigates Evidence of an Afterlife'. So her byline on the article weakens the assumption that the team’s reporting is unbiased.

That is totally false and in fact, I have even tied the data with the F-16's radar images that were released by the Belgian Air Force, so in that respect, there is no basis for what you have stated, especially when the lead F-16 pilot involved in the incident confirmed what I have presented.

skyeagle409: You apparently haven't learned anything from the last time you entered one of these conversations. I am thinking in particular of your Minuteman story, and also the JAL story, both of which were comprehensively shredded on your last outing.

Another false statement on your part, especially since lead FAA investigator confirmed the JAL 1628 incident after he, and software and hardware technicians observed the radar data, and I am very sure that you were aware that communication tapes on the JAL 1628 incident which confirmed EXACTLY, what I have posted in regard to the JAL 1628 incident.

Were you aware that FAA controllers involved in the JAL 1628 incident wrote letters confirming the incident as reported?

It is known the object the Navy pilots saw was a flying vehicle that exhibited advanced technology far beyond that of any aircraft in existence today. Have you ever heard the term, 'IFO? That term has been used in regards to incidents involving these advanced flying objects whose technology far exceeds anything known to mankind.

Quote:

MANEUVERED MOTION AND "INTELLIGENT CONTROL

Following the nearly year-long 1952 UFO sighting wave in which there were repeated instances of jet interceptors chasing after UFOs that also showed on radar, the Central Intelligence Agency convened the so-called Robertson Panel to evaluate the data. Among the presentations made to the scientific panel was one by Dewey J. Fournet (USAF, Ret.) who had worked with scientific analysts conducting a rigorous motion analysis study of hardcore unexplained cases.

Edward J. Ruppelt, former Chief of the Air Force Project Blue Book investigation, later reported that the study was "very hot and very controversial...[it] was hot because it wasn't official and the reason it wasn't official was because it was so hot. It concluded that UFOs were interplanetary spaceships."

Air Force analysts had reached this conclusion before. Project Sign in 1948 had issued a Top Secret Estimate of the Situation drawing the same conclusion (Interplanetary Spaceships).

Many of these jet interception cases included a sort of "cat-and-mouse" behavior on the part of the UFOs, pulling away from the pursuing jets and then slowing down until they caught up again. This behavior has been repeated throughout the history of UFOs, and is one of the many indicators of intelligence behind the phenomenon. Case after case can be cited of UFOs apparently playing interactive games with (a) military aircraft

Just as in the case involving the Navy pilots. Encounters such as these have been occurring around the world for decades, so what the Navy pilots encountered is nothing new.

Here is another example from the U.S. Air Force Academy on a flying saucer encountered by two F-86 Sabre jets.

We too have fired on UFO's. About ten o'clock one morning, a radar site near a fighter base picked up a UFO doing 700 mph. The UFO then slowed to 100 mph, and two F-86's were scrambled to intercept. Eventually one F-86 closed on the UFO at about 3,000 feet altitude. The UFO began to accelerate away but the pilot still managed to get within 500 yards of the target for a short period of time. It was definitely saucer-shaped. As the pilot pushed the F-86 at top speed, the UFO began to pull away. When the range reached 1,000 yards, the pilot armed his guns and fired in an attempt to down the saucer. He failed, and the UFO pulled away rapidly, vanishing in the distance.
[/quote]

Mankind did not have a supersonic flying saucer at the time of that encounter, yet the saucer-shaped flying object was confirmed visually.

People need to understand that we are not alone and that ET visitation is a fact.

[quote]"Of course UFOs are real--and they are interplanetary.....The cumulative evidence for the existence of UFOs is quite overwhelming and I accept the fact of their existence." -Air Chief Marshall Lord Hugh Dowding, commanding officer of the Royal Air Force during WWII. Statement made in August of 1954.
------------------------Lee Graham and Ron Regehr

Lee Graham and Ron Regehr who have shown UFO researcher Don Ecker documents revealing that AeroJet's DSP satellite system alone routinely detects UFOs flying into Earth's atmosphere from deep space two to three times per month.

Fast Walker/DSP

MAY 5, 1984, an alert was triggered at the North America Air Defense Command. Moving at 22,000 miles per hour, it was heading toward Earth and had been determined to NOT be incoming ballistic missles, or any other type of conventionally explainable object. Once tracked, it was code-named "Fast Walker".

This object was first spotted by the ultra-sensitive orbiting USDSP satellites our county uses for detailed surveillance and air defense. These satellites have the infra-red capability to spot small heat sources on the surface of the earth and are time-proven as effective monitoring devices.

At 1400 hours zulu time, an object was spotted by a USDSP satellite and tracked as it sped first directly toward the Earth and passed if front and within 15 miles of the USDSP satellite. It suddenly and without impact or contact with other devices or obstructions curved outward, away from the Earth. It was tracked for another 9 minutes until it then disappeared.

What the data resolved was that it was a hot, fast, solid object that swept in from outer space. This information would probably have been totally kept from public view, but it was leaked.

The statement was "Where it appeared in the (satellite's) sensor field would indicate that the object came into the sensor field from outer-space, went in front of the sensor, and left, departing back into deep space. It would indicate that it was some type of craft that had the ability to maneuver. And there you have hard evidence. You have telemetry from that satellite, you have information, you have systems, you have data that you can go back and investigate and check and verify.

Here is what the Navy Pilots saw as originally published in 2007 in Aviation Week

(Pilot)FAST EAGLES (110/100) COULD NOT FIND UNID AIRBORNE CONTACT AT LOCATION GIVEN BY PRINCETON. WHILE SEARCHING FOR UNID AIR CONTACT, FAST EAGLES SPOTTED LARGE UNID OBJECT IN WATER AT 1430L. PILOTS SAW STEAM/ SMOKE/CHURNING AROUND OBJECT. PILOT DESCRIBES OBJECT INITIALLY AS RESEMBLING A DOWNED AIRLINER, ALSO STATED THAT IT WAS MUCH LARGER THAN A SUBMARINE.

Can you now link me to the US Navy website or press release, that released the new official HUD video, supposedly taken by a second squad of F-18s? Even better. Can you name one of these four pilots from the second group?

I ask you again
You claimed the US Government was preparing to inform the public about alien UFOs. Can you tell me the name of the international treaty where every other country in the world agrees to wait for the USA to release this information? I'm most interested in this treaty between the USA and Soviet Union during the cold war and space race.

Here is what the Navy Pilots saw as originally published in 2007 in Aviation Week

(Pilot)FAST EAGLES (110/100) COULD NOT FIND UNID AIRBORNE CONTACT AT LOCATION GIVEN BY PRINCETON. WHILE SEARCHING FOR UNID AIR CONTACT, FAST EAGLES SPOTTED LARGE UNID OBJECT IN WATER AT 1430L. PILOTS SAW STEAM/ SMOKE/CHURNING AROUND OBJECT. PILOT DESCRIBES OBJECT INITIALLY AS RESEMBLING A DOWNED AIRLINER, ALSO STATED THAT IT WAS MUCH LARGER THAN A SUBMARINE.

Can you now link me to the US Navy website or press release, that released the new official HUD video, supposedly taken by a second squad of F-18s? Even better. Can you name one of these four pilots from the second group?

I ask you again
You claimed the US Government was preparing to inform the public about alien UFOs. Can you tell me the name of the international treaty where every other country in the world agrees to wait for the USA to release this information? I'm most interested in this treaty between the USA and Soviet Union during the cold war and space race.

Depends on how willing their unit is observe the Privacy Act. However, the video was released by the Department of Defense, but, let's stick with the names already released.

Now, let's take a look at what occurred.

Quote:

The U.S. Department of Defense had a secret program to investigate reports of unidentified flying objects, and former Navy pilots in the program say they had a stunning encounter with a UFO in 2004.

The New York Timestells of the mission of Cmdr. David Fravor and Lt. Cmdr. Jim Slaight, who were in training over the Pacific Ocean off the coast of San Diego at the time. They got a strange call from a radio operator. The military had been tracking strange aircraft in the region for about two weeks, the operator said. Sometimes, these flying objects made sudden maneuvers, dove tens of thousands of feet or even hovered, according to the reports.

Asked to investigate, Fravor and Slaight eventually spotted one. About 40 feet (12 meters) long, it was hovering 50 feet (15 m) above the ocean, the Times report says. (Fraser added that the object appeared to be causing a sort of boiling or bubbles in the ocean, as the rest of the water looked calm.

Fraser descended, the object ascended to meet him and then it veered suddenly. "It accelerated like nothing I've ever seen, he said an interview with the Times, adding that he was "pretty weirded out." A few minutes later, the object disappeared, he said.

Such aerial encounters are common, but not printed in the newspapers everyday.

Depends on how willing their unit is observe the Privacy Act. However, the video was released by the Department of Defense, but, let's stick with the names already released.

So you are unable to find either a US Navy or Department of Defence press release or website releasing the new HUD video footage. So why do you think it is real footage?

Originally Posted by skyeagle409

Now, let's take a look at what occurred.

"The New York Timestells of the mission of Cmdr. David Fravor and Lt. Cmdr. Jim Slaight, who were in training over the Pacific Ocean off the coast of San Diego at the time."

You haven't actually read anything have you? Fravor and Slaight saw the whales. The HUD video was supposedly from another group of four F-18s and nothing to do with Fravor and Slaight. This is the video's claim:

"The two Super Hornets (Fravor and Slaight) returned to the USS Nimitz and were replaced by a second flight of four more Super Hornets, this time bearing Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR) sensor pods. The second flight of Super Hornets also encountered the “capsule”, but this time they got infrared video, which somehow made it to YouTube. "http://www.popularmechanics.com/mili...er-with-a-ufo/

I suggest you read the story next time before telling us what you guessed happened.

I ask you again for the third time.
You claimed the US Government was preparing to inform the public about alien UFOs. Can you tell me the name of the international treaty where every other country in the world agrees to wait for the USA to release this information? I'm most interested in this treaty between the USA and Soviet Union during the cold war and space race.

Here is what the Navy Pilots saw as originally published in 2007 in Aviation Week

(Pilot)FAST EAGLES (110/100) COULD NOT FIND UNID AIRBORNE CONTACT AT LOCATION GIVEN BY PRINCETON. WHILE SEARCHING FOR UNID AIR CONTACT, FAST EAGLES SPOTTED LARGE UNID OBJECT IN WATER AT 1430L. PILOTS SAW STEAM/ SMOKE/CHURNING AROUND OBJECT. PILOT DESCRIBES OBJECT INITIALLY AS RESEMBLING A DOWNED AIRLINER, ALSO STATED THAT IT WAS MUCH LARGER THAN A SUBMARINE.

Can you now link me to the US Navy website or press release, that released the new official HUD video, supposedly taken by a second squad of F-18s? Even better. Can you name one of these four pilots from the second group?

Depends on how willing their unit is observe the Privacy Act. However, the video was released by the Department of Defense, but, let's stick with the names already released

Quote:

I ask you again
You claimed the US Government was preparing to inform the public about alien UFOs. Can you tell me the name of the international treaty where every other country in the world agrees to wait for the USA to release this information? I'm most interested in this treaty between the USA and Soviet Union during the cold war and space race.

Since you mentioned the 'Cold War' I just wanted to ask if you were aware that the former Soviet Union lost control of its strategic missiles when they went into launch mode and during the time they lost control of their missiles, a flying saucer was reported hovering over their base? How many people were aware that incident occurred or aware of what was reported hovering over the base? Perhaps, a message is being sent that the most advanced civilization in the universe is not mankind. That incident involving the Soviets also involved the United States and even Britain, where nukes were tampered with in that country when UFOs appeared overhead.

It is my opinion that ET revelation will be made based on what I have been observing over recent years and that is, a number of countries around the world, including the United States, have slowly begun releasing their own UFO case files. Were you aware that the U.S. Government has been quietly releasing its UFO files from the National Archives? You might also want to review the COMETA Report.

Basically speaking, I blame the 1938 'War of the World' broadcast and the Brookings Institute warning to NASA in its 1960 report on dire consequences for mankind if it were revealed alien reality and think the reason why govenments around the globe are now releasing their UFO files is to gage public reaction because once revelation is officially made, there can no turning back the clock and the world will never be the same again.

Personally speaking, I think the world could take the news that we have been visited by ET, but governments around the world do not share my view at this time, but give them time because it is coming. For me, the question as to are we alone, has been answered (we are not alone) by my own experience and experiences of my compatriots in regard to declassified documentations/records and other information from reliable sources, one of whom confirmed to me personally the reality of these advanced and exotic flying objects and he was instrumental in the development of America's DSP surveillance satellite.

Quote:

SPACE-LIFE REPORT COULD BE SHOCK, UFOI,

Vol. I, No. II (Dec 1960 - Jan 1961 issue)

The discovery of intelligent space beings could have a severe effect on the public, according to a research report released by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The report warned that America should prepare to meet the psychological impact of such a revelation.

The 190-page report was the result of a $96,000 one-year study conducted by the Brookings Institution for NASA's long-range study committee.

Public realization that intelligent beings live on other planets could bring about profound changes, or even the collapse of our civilization, the research report stated.

As I have said before, such encounters with the flying objects are nothing new and are in fact, very common, but you never hear about it unless an incident is leaked for some reason or another. That is how we found that the space-based surveillance and ground-based deep space surveillance assets have been tracking these flying objects every month, and once again, its something that you will not read about everyday in the news papers. Making use of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) will provide much information that you will not find in the news.

So once again, what the Navy pilots encountered has been encountered thousands of time over the decades, it is that you just never hear much about such encounters unless such encounters are leaked or if you or someone else decide the make a request for official and declassified UFO documents under the FOIA, which will open a lot of eyes as to what has been occurring in space above earth, within the atmosphere and beneath the seas, which incidentally, the objects are known as USOs.

"The fighter jets returned to the Nimitz, where everyone on the ship had learned of Commander Fravor’s encounter and was making fun of him."

Now think carefully, skyeagle409. If Flavor had the recording of the UFO on his HUD display and could show that footage to his flight officer at mission debrief.......then why was everyone making fun of him? Why didn't this stop happening when the supposed second group of F-18s returned with the footage?

Have you confused what Flavor saw with the video that recently appeared on You-tube?

Similarities with Washington UFO Flap / Radar / Temperature inversions USA Navy Princeton"For two weeks, the operator said, the Princeton had been tracking mysterious aircraft. The objects appeared suddenly at 80,000 feet, and then hurtled toward the sea, eventually stopping at 20,000 feet and hovering. Then they either dropped out of radar range or shot straight back up.

Washington 1952He made a quick check with airport Weather Station and determined that there was a slight temperature inversion (about 1 degree) from the surface to about 1000'. However, he felt that the scope targets at the time were not the result of this inversion and so advised the Command Post with the suggestion that a second intercept flight be requested. (2nd intercept flight controlled by ARTC, but no strong targets remained when they arrived. They were vectored on dim targets with negative results.) Maj. Fournet and
Lt. Holcomb remained in ARTC Center until 0415, but no additional strong targets were picked up; many dim and unstable targets (assumed due to temperature inversion) were observed throughout the remainder of the period.

“All [ARTC] crew members emphatic that most u/I returns were ‘solid.’ Finally, it was mentioned that u/i returns have been picked up from time to time over the past few months but never before had they appeared in such quantities over such a prolonged period and with such definition as was experienced on the nights of 19/20 and 26/27 July 52” (The peak radar returns occurred in summer in July)

"Finally, as a crew member related, "The radar had a target [which] turned out to be the Wilson Lines steamboat trip to Mount Vernon . . . the radar was sure as hell picking up the steamboat"

Blue Book Case 1661

(In Washington, one of the false inversion readings was from the Mount Vernon Tourist steam boat.)

Would that be Luis Elizondo and Tom Delonge setting up their new UFO hunting company "To the Stars Academy"?

I like their new entertainment division. "The Entertainment Division is composed of our wholly-owned subsidiary To The Stars, Inc., a vertically integrated business specializing in the licensing and creation of award-winning, original content. Our content aims to educate and inspire curiosity in scientific possibilities through various media formats like film, television, books, music and art."

Lucky Luis Elizondo was able to acquire that new F-18 UFO video from UFO chasers at MUFON and give it to the New York Times after the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program ended five years ago and he lost his job.

Gosh. You think he would have told the New York Times five years ago rather than wait for his new UFO company to need funding. That and most journalists are on holidays when he released the video.

"The fighter jets returned to the Nimitz, where everyone on the ship had learned of Commander Fravor’s encounter and was making fun of him."

That is nothing new of those who have experienced such encounters. Ignorance is mainly responsible, but I have noticed there are many cases where pilot reports were corroborated by radar and other technical data and eyewitnesses accounts. Here is one such case where the co-pilot tried to look inside the object as they flew by. Not only was the object confirmed visually by the aircrew and by ground-based radar, but by the aircraft's own radar as well. Radarscope film of the object can be found at the second link.

Now think carefully, skyeagle409. If Flavor had the recording of the UFO on his HUD display and could show that footage to his flight officer at mission debrief.......then why was everyone making fun of him? Why didn't this stop happening when the supposed second group of F-18s returned with the footage?

Have you confused what Flavor saw with the video that recently appeared on You-tube?

Let me put it this way, I am well aware that such encounters are more common than you might think and that in some cases, pilots were lost while intercepting these flying objects, but you don't hear much about that because those encounters were classified. However, you can find declassified information detailing incidents where pilots were lost. A case that people are not aware of was the lost of a Cuban Mig-21 pilot whose aircraft disintegrated as he tried to intercept a UFO and it took a few minutes for his wingman to compose himself enough in order to report what occurred. The UFO then climbed above 90.000 feet before heading south. Air Force intelligence was listening in on the encounter and turned the data tape over to the NSA, but you never heard a thing about it in the news and that is where the FOIA comes in handy.

Quote:

Similarities with Washington UFO Flap / Radar / Temperature inversions USA Navy Princeton"For two weeks, the operator said, the Princeton had been tracking mysterious aircraft. The objects appeared suddenly at 80,000 feet, and then hurtled toward the sea, eventually stopping at 20,000 feet and hovering. Then they either dropped out of radar range or shot straight back up.

First of all, temperature inversion had nothing to do with the flying object overflying Washington D.C. in 1952. Air intercept radars are all-weather radar systems and I might add that radar have filters as well. Anyone who is familiar with temperature inversions would have known that explanation was false to say the least. The objects on the radar scopes were no only confirmed by controllers looking out the windows, but by pilots in the sky that night. Eyewitnesses watched as the objects raced across town and surrounded an airliner and a F-94 that was sent to intercept the objects. The F-94 pilot panicked and called out to the air traffic controllers for help and it is all documented.

Quote:

Washington 1952He made a quick check with airport Weather Station and determined that there was a slight temperature inversion (about 1 degree) from the surface to about 1000'. However, he felt that the scope targets at the time were not the result of this inversion and so advised the Command Post with the suggestion that a second intercept flight be requested. (2nd intercept flight controlled by ARTC, but no strong targets remained when they arrived. They were vectored on dim targets with negative results.) Maj. Fournet and
Lt. Holcomb remained in ARTC Center until 0415, but no additional strong targets were picked up; many dim and unstable targets (assumed due to temperature inversion) were observed throughout the remainder of the period.

“All [ARTC] crew members emphatic that most u/I returns were ‘solid.’ Finally, it was mentioned that u/i returns have been picked up from time to time over the past few months but never before had they appeared in such quantities over such a prolonged period and with such definition as was experienced on the nights of 19/20 and 26/27 July 52” (The peak radar returns occurred in summer in July)

"Finally, as a crew member related, "The radar had a target [which] turned out to be the Wilson Lines steamboat trip to Mount Vernon . . . the radar was sure as hell picking up the steamboat"

Blue Book Case 1661

(In Washington, one of the false inversion readings was from the Mount Vernon Tourist steam boat.)

As I have mentioned, temperature inversion was not responsible for the objects over Washington D.C. In fact, the Air Force debunked temperature inversion with its own 1969 report. As a pilot of 48 years, I knew that there was no way that temperature inversion was responsible for what occurred over Washington D.C. and I saw that explanation coming from someone who was totally ignorance of what temperature inversion can and cannot do or that the person was concocting another cover-up. Let's take a look here.

Quote:

"Quantitative Aspects of Mirages,"

According to a 1969 study by the Air Force Environmental Technical Applications Center, the conditions needed to produce the UFO-like effects attributed to inversions cannot exist in the Earth's atmosphere.

The official explanation for the objects seen on radars was 'temperature inversions'. UFOlogists believe that temperature inversions could have been the cause of the blips seen on radar, although highly unlikely. They also point out that this does nothing to explain the hundreds of visual sightings, both from the air and from the ground. In fact, it is apparent that Project Bluebook also discounted this explanation as the Washington DC Lights case was officially classified as 'unknown'.

Pilots also disagreed with the temperature inversions explanation and noted that they were perfectly aware of temperature inversions in the area that night (they are in fact quite common in the Washington DC area). They indicated that they never believed the lights they saw were temperature inversions and wonder why the explanation was so easily accepted by the public since it was common knowledge that the known temperature inversions were at 1000 feet and the objects they spotted were much higher, often in the 8,000 to 10,000 feet range.

Radar operators at Washington National Airport (using a Type ASR-1 radar) and Washington ARTC Center (using a MEW radar) were also skeptical of the temperature inversion theory. Radar controller Barnes stated: "Inversion blips are always recognized by experts, we are familiar with what weather conditions, flying birds, and [other] such things can cause on radar." The operators noted that temperature inversions on radar are typically weak returns and move at a slow ground speed. These blips were distinctly clear (reported as "a very good return" and "solid") and often traveled and unbelievable speeds.

In other words, the temperature inversion explanation was about as lame of an explanation as lame can get and what the Navy pilots experienced had nothing to do with temperature inversion by any means.

My father was a Group Captain (full bird colonel) in the RAAF during the cold war. Are you going to claim "he was in on the secret"?

That depends. I was also in the Air Force during the Cold War and know a lot more than the typical person on the street in regard to UFOs generating a national security threat against our strategic missiles and safety hazards posed to our aircraft.

Quote:

The secret international treaty that the USA says Alien UFOs exist first So there is no such international treaty and your fantasy is that the USA gets "first go" at telling the world......based on your gut feeling?

Revelation is not going to be made in the White House, it will be made at the United Nations because nations around globe have been affected.

Quote:

Gosh. I wonder why Iran, Russia and North Korea don't tell the world first to embarrass the USA?

Quote:

First of all, let's take a look at Iran. Here are documents of Iran's encounter with multiple flying objects that was also confirmed by our DSP satellite and understand that Iran's report of the encounter made it all the way to the White House.

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, a number of ex-Soviet Army personnel came forward and began discussing their involvement in similar incidents in that country during the Cold War era. One of those events occurred on October 4, 1982, near the Ukrainian town of Byelokoroviche, when a disc-shaped UFO apparently hovered over a nuclear missile base for an extended period. At one point during the encounter, a number of nuclear missiles suddenly activated—without authorization from Moscow or any action being taken by the missile launch officers—and were preparing to launch! Had they done so, World War III would have very probably been underway. Fortunately, after 15 seconds, the anomalous activation ceased and the missiles returned to stand-by status. A subsequent investigation by the Soviet government discovered no equipment malfunctions that would have explained the event.

This incident was first publicized in October 1994, on the American ABC News program Prime Time Live (which unethically used KGB documents and source leads provided to its producers by KLAS-TV reporter George Knapp, without crediting his contributions).

More recently, on 24 July 1957 Russian anti-aircraft batteries on the Kouril Islands opened fire on UFO's. Although all Soviet anti-aircraft batteries on the Islands were in action, no hits were made. The UFO's were luminous and moved very fast. We too have fired on UFO's.

UFOs have created havoc over the Korean peninsula as well and here is where I come in.

Quote:

Retired Military Personnel To Confirm UFO Incursions at American Nuclear Weapons Sites

UFOs Visited Nuclear Weapons Sites, Former Air Force Officers Say

(Sept. 21) — UFOs have monitored and possibly tampered with American nuclear weapons, according to a group of former Air Force officers who will make their claims public next week at a Washington, D.C., news conference.

“While most of the incidents apparently involved mere surveillance, in a few cases, a significant number of nuclear missiles suddenly and simultaneously malfunctioned, just as USAF security policemen reported seeing disc-shaped craft hovering nearby,” says Robert Hastings, author of “UFOs and Nukes: Extraordinary Encounters at Nuclear Weapons Sites.”

Declassified U.S. government documents and the testimony of more than 120 former or retired military personnel have established, beyond doubt, the reality of ongoing UFO incursions at American nuclear weapons sites.